Raise your hands if you understand you do not sell public assets to cover massive corporate fraud---EVERYONE.
In order for wireless and internet to have more air space for millions of cat memes and APPs no one uses---every book in every library digitized so we can get rid of libraries......we need to hand more and more of public air waves to these communications corporations. Public access TV/radio----free TV ----- no profit there say neo-liberals and neo-cons. Besides, there is all of that ' journalism IS ONLY by professionals working for media corporations' that takes away from the public needing air waves.
BYE-BYE PUBLIC LIBRARIES AND PUBLIC AND FREE TV! WHAT DO YOU THINK THIS IS----A DEMOCRACY?
FCC to expand wireless spectrum
Published Sep 29, 2012 at 05:00AM / Updated Nov 19, 2013 at 12:31AM
WASHINGTON — The government took a big step Friday to aid the creation of new high-speed wireless Internet networks that could fuel the development of the next generation of smartphones, tablets and devices that have not even been thought of yet.
The Federal Communications Commission unanimously approved a sweeping, though preliminary, proposal to reclaim public airwaves currently used for broadcast television and auction them off for use in wireless broadband networks, with a portion of the proceeds paid to the broadcasters.
The initiative, which the FCC says would be the first in which any government would pay to reclaim public airwaves with the intention of selling them, would help satisfy what many industry experts say is booming demand for wireless Internet capacity.
Mobile broadband traffic will increase more than 30-fold by 2015, the commission estimates.
shaping the future
Ensuring Viewers' Are Not Denied New and Better TV Services
The future of TV is bright, and we want to ensure it stays that way. Viewers are just beginning to realize the full potential of digital TV, including the best quality HD, additional free channels and mobile TV. And ultra HD and 3D television is on the horizon.
But decisions made by the federal government about how the airwaves are used could impact television's ability to innovate.
Wireless companies claim that they need more spectrum (or airwaves) – including airwaves that local TV stations currently use to provide free services – to meet the demands of increasing wireless Internet services. In response, Congress passed a law in 2012 allowing an auction of broadcast TV airwaves for those stations that choose to participate.
Thanks to the tireless efforts of advocates like you, the law includes protections to help prevent viewers from losing access to free broadcast TV and all of the news, emergency information, sports and entertainment you expect and deserve.
Now, it is up to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to implement the legislation, and we must ensure that they follow through on that promise to ensure viewers like you are not harmed.
Broadcasters are excited about the future; we are innovating and developing new technologies and integrating new platforms to deliver the best shows on TV when and where viewers want to watch them.
We want to ensure that TV viewers have access to the great services they currently receive and those on the horizon. Sign up to learn more about this issue and find out what you can do to help ensure government actions don't threaten your local TV service.
Learn more about spectrum (or airwaves) with Spectrum 101 (in Spanish).
FORGET THE REPUBLICANS-----IT'S THE NEO-LIBERALS WHO ARE KILLING YOU AND I
Of course neo-liberals are taking the lead in this policy because selling public air waves is all about paying for unemployment benefits you know. Always looking of for the little people those neo-liberals. Gillibrand doesn't want to go to Wall Street to collect the fraud ---she says let's take public assets! Long term unemployment created by FED policy and global corporations---NO, Gillibrand says----the public airwaves must go to maximize corporate profits.
70% of American people living at poverty and neo-liberals are working to take away even the ability to watch free TV....no means of communication for the masses! Take away the public Post Office and most American people will be using smoke signals to communicate! When you are moving the US to third world status you must keep people in the dark!
ALL MARYLAND POLS ARE NEO-LIBERALS AND NEO-CONS---
Congress to Sell Public Airwaves to Pay Benefits
Luke Sharrett for The New York Times
Senators Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, both Democrats, on Thursday before a news conference on an emergency communications network to be created by auctioning airwaves.
By EDWARD WYATT and JENNIFER STEINHAUER Published: February 16, 2012 227 Comments
WASHINGTON — The need for revenue to partly cover the extension of the payroll tax cut and long-term unemployment benefits has pushed Congress to embrace a generational shift in the country’s media landscape: the auction of public airwaves now used for television broadcasts to create more wireless Internet systems.
The switch to DTV was done completely with no discussion as to how this policy will affect the future generations. We were simply exposed to flashes of public service announcements to get what was needed for this change. People never knew what was going on behind the scenes and once again-----THERE IS BILL CLINTON AND NEO-LIBERALS----IN 1996 and now with Obama and neo-liberals in Congress-----in one of the largest grabs of public assets in history.
I bet you didn't even know this......didn't teach it in school.....no discussion in public policy meetings for the public.....no labor and justice leaders outraged over this attack on their memberships......
This is serious folks---global corporations and their pols are taking away every means the majority of citizens have to communicate and get news.
THIS HAPPENS BECAUSE THE MEDIA IN MARYLAND IS SO CAPTURED AS TO KEEP PEOPLE UNINFORMED.
A Democratic Party leadership and Governor would rebuild those channels in public media and in community town halls because Democrats have a platform of working for labor and justice. Neo-liberals and neo-cons work for wealth and profit.
Glen Ford, editor of the online Black Agenda Report calls the DTV transition “the biggest squandering of public broadcast resources in the history of the United States.”
August 05, 2009
The DTV Transition Puts Corporate Profits Ahead of the Public Interest Privatizing the Airwaves
by STEVE MACEK And SCOTT SANDERS
The much-delayed switchover to digital TV is now behind us. On June 12, all full power TV stations in the country ceased their analog broadcasts and made the final switch to a digital only format.
In the lead up to the DTV transition, the public’s attention focused almost entirely upon ways of mitigating the switchover’s effect on the elderly, the poor and non-English speakers who rely on over-the-air television far more than the general population. In response to such concerns, the federal government created a coupon program that subsidized most of the cost of digital-to-analog converter boxes, but then failed to fully fund it. When it became clear that millions of households would not be ready for DTV by the original February 17 deadline, Congress pushed back the transition date.
The extra time — together with an additional $650 million appropriated by Congress for more converter boxes and more public outreach — seems to have done the trick. Though some viewers have reported losing the signals of individual stations in certain markets, the vast majority of Americans weathered the shift to DTV without losing service or being excessively inconvenienced.
Yet, there is another problem with the DTV transition, one that has never gotten the sort of headlines that the shortage of converter box coupons did. The fact is that the shift to digital television represents a massive government giveaway to a handful of powerful media conglomerates.
The Clinton-era 1996 Telecommunications Act which mandated the change to DTV stripped away most media ownership concentration limits and gave away huge swathes — up to $90 billion worth — of publicly owned digital broadcast spectrum to incumbent TV license holders. In return for giving up a single analog channel, each of these broadcasters received up to 10 digital channels in return. For free. Only one new public service requirement was added — a modest increase in children’s programming.
To make matters worse, most digital subchannels run by the big network-affiliated stations air duplicative services such as sitcom reruns, old movies, weather, home shopping programs or cooking shows.
That is, if they run anything at all. Despite recent failures such as their flawed coverage leading up to the invasion of Iraq, none of the commercial broadcasters have announced plans we’re aware of to use the new channels to expand or improve their public affairs or news programming.
Where are the digital channels for women and people of color, and the set asides to support independent programming by and for youth and other less advantaged groups, local C-SPANs and other experimental services? Where are the new public affairs programs designed to showcase the perspectives normally marginalized on commercial TV?
Such diversity on the airwaves is needed now more than ever. People of color make up 34 percent of the U.S. population, but only around 3 percent of commercial full power TV license holders, with women holding just 5 percent.
Glen Ford, editor of the online Black Agenda Report calls the DTV transition “the biggest squandering of public broadcast resources in the history of the United States.”
Steps should be taken to ensure that corporations are not the sole beneficiaries of the digital broadcasting age. The value of the broadcast spectrum that Congress simply handed over to the big corporate media ought to be recovered through appropriate means (taxes, license fees, etc.) and used to subsidize a democratically run, decentralized public media system, the sort of media that will provide a forum for the minority and dissident viewpoints sorely missing on mainstream TV.
Many talented professional journalists are unemployed or waiting tables right now due to the deepening crisis of the corporate journalism model. We need to foster partnerships between professional and citizen journalists and public TV and radio outlets, PEG access centers, community and micro-radio stations, and other community media. Picture a local public media homepage that looks sort of like a daily newspaper but with prominent live TV and radio streams, lots of links to article and program related resources and social media, with the feel of an online public library and town commons.
And no commercial advertisements whatsoever.
A functioning fifth estate is essential to the maintenance of democracy.
We can and must fix this bad DTV deal, and create and permanently fund various new and extensively reworked public media outlets and centers.
We must collectively piece together a system with the highest measure of accountability for every community across the nation as if lives depend on it. Because they do.
Steve Macek is an associate professor of speech communication at North Central College.
Scott Sanders is a longtime Chicago media and democracy advocate.
Here is the original push for keeping air waves in the public domain.....it took Clinton to make the move to handing all to Wall Street.
This proclamation on the public domain may be too politically correct for some but what these FCC regulations do is offer the public control of whether a media outlet should have a license, place controls that most think are needed in a civil society, and it keeps corporations in check as to control of the airwaves. All of this is what neo-liberals and neo-cons are dismantling. Consolidation beyond monopoly/anti-trust is creating a not-ready-for prime time media with so many commercials.....so many rerun channels....so many paid advertisement shows.....that people are viewing TV less and less. Remember, to blow up a public service load it with fraud and corruption----have you seen those paid advertisements?----cut quality and access-----and VOILA----there goes public access and public airwaves.
LYING, CHEATING, STEALING, DEATH AND SURVEILLANCE -----ARE ALL REOCCURRING THEMES THESE DAYS. WONDER WHY??
Air Waves “are in the Public Domain”: Public Television Advocacy in the 1950s
Although educational radio stations flourished in the early 1920s—more than 200 existed prior to the introduction of network radio in 1926—most faltered shortly thereafter. One reason was the alignment of the Federal Radio Commission (FRC), created by legislation declaring that the airwaves belonged to the public, with commercial interests. When the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) replaced the FRC in 1934, educational, religious, and labor groups promoted an amendment requiring the allocation of one-fourth of all broadcast licenses to nonprofit organizations. The amendment failed to pass, and by 1937, only 38 educational radio stations remained in operation. In 1948, as sales of televisions skyrocketed, Freida B. Hennock, the first female FCC commissioner, began a campaign to assign channel frequencies for nonprofit, educational use. Advocates backing Hennock documented the high number of acts or threats of violence shown to children every week on commercial television broadcasts. Consequently, when the FCC in 1952 added UHF (ultra high frequency) channels to the existing VHF (very high frequency) channels, they reserved 10 percent for use by nonprofit educational organizations. In the following testimony to a 1955 Congressional subcommittee, Hennock advocated oversight of commercial television by governmental and civic bodies and championed educational television. The testimony from the general manager of a new Pittsburgh educational station, William Wood, follows. Wood emphasized the lack of violence in his ‘poverty stricken’ station’s programming and included excerpts from fan mail praising an acclaimed children’s show, The Children’s Corner, a program co-produced by Fred Rogers, who later created, Mr. Rogers' Neighborhood. Until 1967, however, when the Federal government established the Corporation for Public Broadcasting to appropriate funds for public television, non-commercial stations struggled to survive.
STATEMENT OF HON. FRIEDA B. HENNOCK, MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION . . .
As I state on the first page, I know of no field where there is more important work to be done by the Senate than in juvenile delinquency, and the attention this committee is giving to this critical problem is most timely. Nowhere can this committee be more effective in stemming the excessive, concentrated and exaggerated portrayal of crime and violence than in radio and television. For the air waves over which broadcasters send their signals are in the public domain. The broadcasters acquire no vested interest in the air waves, and are issued licenses of no more than 3 years' duration.
The FCC requires broadcasters to operate in the public interest, and it must take programming into full account in issuing and renewing their licenses.
Here I want to say, Mr. Chairman, that in 1938 the Senate Interstate Commerce Committee was opposed to superpower, large AM broadcasting stations.
Senator Wheeler was then the chairman. By the mere passage of the resolution of that committee, which the FCC has ever since honored, the FCC never has gone in for superpower AM stations—just the mere passage of a resolution of that committee.
Now, this is the public domain, and I am going on from here as to what your committee can do as far as we are concerned, the FCC and the broadcasters and the public.
Broadcasters who apply for station licenses and for license renewals are required to report in detail the percentage of time devoted to different types of programs such as entertainment, religion, news, education, discussion—I did not list them all—and those that are sustaining and commercial, and so forth; that is when they apply for a license.
Now, the objective is to insure balanced programming responsive to the needs, interests, and tastes of the communities served by the licensees.
In addition to the foregoing, the FCC should have a brand-new requirement which we do not now have, but which is clearly indicated as a result of the hearings you have had here, and that is, I think, we should require the broadcasters to tell the number of acts and threats of crime and violence on all their programs throughout the broadcast day.
Moreover, the FCC should pursue a rigorous policy of refusing renewal of the licenses of offending stations which disregard their public-service responsibilities by continuing to victimize immature audiences with a concentrated and profuse deluge of crime, brutality, sadism, and outright murder.
The programming standards set out in the code of the National Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters are excellent, but they have little effect on programming as the code is voluntary and the NARTB is not in a position to enforce it effectively. . . . < p>In addition, I urge the following steps:
1. Women’s organizations and all other civic, educational, welfare, and religious groups should supplement the activities of established monitoring organizations in viewing and listening to TV and radio programs. All such groups should press the stations, the networks, the program sponsors and the FCC itself to bring to a halt the broadcast of pernicious programs which are making a significant contribution to the rise of juvenile delinquency.
2. These public-service groups should study the reports of the FCC licensees. . . .
3. A National Radio and TV Children’s Week should be proclaimed during which there should be an evaluation of all radio and television programs in terms of their suitability for children.
4. An alert and articulate public should, as of right, present positive and constructive suggestions to licensees and sponsors as to its radio and TV program preferences for adults and children alike. . . .
The public should no longer take its radio and TV programing for granted, or continue to accept passively anything the networks and broadcasters choose to offer.
5. Since radio and TV operate in the public domain, the FCC should set up proper programing standards for both as soon as possible, and insure their implementation by rigorous enforcement. . . .
And last, of course, you expected me to say something about educational television, I am sure. .........